Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Supported by

Pampering and Prices

By Frank Bruni September 28, 2007 10:37 amSeptember 28, 2007 10:37 am

My eagle-eyed colleague Florence Fabricant — FloFab, as she’s known to bloggers and to her many admirers here in the office — pointed me toward a recent article in the Financial Times by the restaurant critic Nicholas Lander.

For restaurant lovers it’s very much worth a look, and I draw attention to it here because the Financial Times isn’t a publication that gets seen and mentioned much in the many food-related blogs that do such a thorough, useful job of listing and linking to relevant articles out there.

Mr. Lander’s article is titled “Cut the fuss, add to the pleasure,” and if you stay patient through the opening six or seven paragraphs, you’ll be rewarded after that point with some interesting observations about, and suggestions for, ways that restaurants could let go of certain niceties in the interest of keeping the prices they charge down. I’m curious about readers’ reactions to these suggestions.

The article — focusing, of course, on the London dining scene — maintains that the costs of running a restaurant are on the rise worldwide and that prices charged by restaurants may therefore increase significantly. Those slow-going opening paragraphs go into some of the reasons for this.

Then the article becomes more provocative. For starters Mr. Lander condones what he describes as an increasingly common practice in restaurants of “timed bookings,” meaning tables that come with a time limit: you sit at 8 p.m., say, and must be out by 10.

He writes that “this is the only significant practical alternative to raising prices.”

His counsel applies principally to fancier restaurants, and it proposes a trade-off. Diners accept fewer curlicues in service and less frippery at the edges of meals in return for entrée prices that don’t spiral above $50.

“First,” Mr. Lander writes, “I would propose the elimination of the charger plate, the ridiculous and invariably expensive empty plate that is at every place setting when the customer sits down.”

He later adds, “I also think that the array of amuse-bouches, breads and petit fours that an ambitious restaurant now makes an integral part of the meal has got completely out of hand.”

Mr. Lander says that “too many” of the chefs who say they can’t find enough talented kitchen help “put far too much emphasis on these often intricate and invariably time-consuming tidbits. Is there anything much better than a bowl of good olives to nibble on while studying the menu?”

He thinks the platoon of servers that a restaurant needs during a given lunch or dinner service would be less populous — and thus less costly — if the restaurant parted with such practices as the re-folding of napkins when a diner leaves the table for a few minutes and the ingredient-by-ingredient recitation of dishes.

It’s at long last time, he writes, “to reassess the waiter’s role.”
He makes his case better than I can describe it. Give the article — from last weekend — a read. You may find yourself nodding vigorously in agreement. Or shaking your head no.

Clearly the number of restaurants offering classic luxury service has been on the decline for a long time. Yet, some of this city’s most expensive luxury restaurants are fully booked on a regular basis, which strongly suggests that there remains a vigorous demand for that kind of experience.

It’s hard to quantify the value of any particular ritual. But taken together, all of those little things add up, creating an impression that the diner is being pampered luxuriously. That is part of what you pay for when you dine at that kind of restaurant.

I don’t know how much less dinner at Per Se would cost if it were served in the ambiance of Franny’s Pizzeria. But I think there are very good reasons why Thomas Keller doesn’t offer it that way.

I believe that the “frippery” and “curlicues” Mr. Lander’s refers to are limited to a particular style of restaurant and to do away with them would be to remove an entire class of dining period.

I expect to pay a premium for just such an experience and could care less about the added costs of having a charger on the table or a backwaiter refolding my napking when I get up from the table or an unneccsary and overwhelming selection of “postprandial petit fours” on the heels of a sumptuous, 5-course meal.

Besides – you’d be handing out a lot more 4-star reviews if the type of opulence Mr. Lander’s seems to want to do away with were as mainstream as he seems to indicate it is.

I certainly agree with the point about reciting the specials in painful detail. Not only is it difficult to remember the specials, and an opportunity for the restaurant to charge $10 more than their other entrees for no good reason, it’s often difficult to hear (especially for older people in noisier restaurants), and adds several minutes to the waiter’s job, minutes that could be used serving someone else and reducing the waiter-hour/table costs. How about laser-printing the specials on some nicely designed letterhead instead? Save everybody some trouble!

let’s see… I would happily get rid of the menu recitations… if we have to save money, how about just moving strictly to the fixed price format? Or ordering ahead of time online? In a sense we are losing a 20th century sensibility of service, but returning to grander 19th century roots. I would hate to have everyone eating exactly the same thing at the same time (although there is a bit of interesting sociology in that), but perhaps a more set format would in fact enable and embolden the potential for whimsy and surprise. As is, I often find the frippery rather rote… there is little amuse in the bouches which seem almost a canned experience.

I agree with the general sentiment that there are times when I want the frippery and curlicues. There are, however, times when I don’t them but still want extraordinary food. The occasional practice of having multiple dining rooms with differences in the complexities of the service seems to be a good alternative.

I try to live simply and sensibly. But, there is a time and a place for over the top luxury dining. When the time is right I love it, and my wife and I indulge ourselves to the max. I still aspire to a meal at the four star Taillevant in Paris. Bring on the amuse-bouche, the petite fours, the palate cleanser, the fish knife, the charger plate, the cheese course, the finger bowl, the exotic wine, all the fancy desserts you can find and as many waiters, captains, maitre’ d’s, sommeliers and napkin folders that can be mustered. Such occasions are no time for cost cutting. If you want a fast inexpensive meal, I know of several fine coffee shops and diners in the city where you can get a great hamburger, some fries or bowl of chili. Those have their time and place, too.

What a curmudgeonly view!! If you don’t want to pay for this type of food and service then don’t go. There are restaurants that cater to all levels of price and quality, it’s a crazy market driven world!!

I think something of this sort is already happening at places like Cafe Gray, which is less formal and significantly less expensive than nearby Per Se or Jean Georges, but takes its food seriously. Lack of table cloths, reservations made available only at 6:00 and 9:30, and other similar cost-cutting or revenue-maximizing efforts are visible everywhere. I hope the old-fashioned, classic service, perfectly appointed tables, and grand settings stay around, but think that increasingly it will be confined to a few very expensive places, where occasionally I will gladly pay the tariff to be pampered. A dinner at Daniel or Le Bernardin is not an experience I need, want or can afford every day, but it’s always a treat when I go. As for amuse-bouches and petit fours, I am in agreement that a couple of each is plenty.

The question is what you really value from from the restaurant. Do you really want the experience or do you really want the food? Personally, I’m there for the food so a lot of the little things can be done away with and I’m fine with it. Personally, I can skip the amuse bouche – it doesn’t add much and I know that I’m paying for it even if it doesn’t end up on the bill.

Of course they want ‘Frippery and Curlicues’. What else can you want when you can not taste? Next, the waiter who re-folds your napkin will follow you to the rest room to…..
When palettes are bred to experience pleasure, the show business is not necessary, but people who grew up on Twinkies and TV dinners need this nonsense to be sure they’re having a good time.
John Hess said it all in 1974, but who wants to hear it, even today?

These cost saving measures are interesting to say the least. Although I seldom take 2 hours in a restaurant. I do not expect nor tolerate being hustled out nor do I find it very pleasurable when the staff is on top of you continually making it clear without comment that one should hurry up and get out. This destroys the enjoyment of the outing. The abundance of bread sticks and regalia is a sure sign of very meager, over priced portions. The amount of “bread” on the table is proprtionate to the size of the meal. More bread, less meal. Simple formula. I also have a severe pet peeve over the “forced” gratuities tha most resaurants add to one’s bill. It’s not a gratuity if it is forced. I always believed that gratuities were a diner’s way of indicating how much they enjoyed the service. I found as well that the service is by far better at establishments that do not have a forced gratuity. Of course when a server HAS to perform well to get the gratuity it is remarkable how motivated that individual is when they actually have to work for it. I agree that extra needed verbage is largely a waste of time and annoyance unless asked for. I realize that there are those that attain some feeling of “class” when they perk up to the waiter’s dialogue and let them ramble on uselessly. For me, waste of time. If I want to know I will ask. (maybe they could teach someone how to make a decent blue rare steak! (kidding) chuckle)

If you are trying to have remarkable service you truly need NEED NEED the charger plate, detailed descriptions of dishes, amuse and petit fours, and the army of servers in addition to other things that most diners did not even know they existed. These are things that have come to be expected of a high quality restaurant. Upon removal of these items to lower the entree cost, I believe the change would certainly be minuscule. And the loss of these items would drastically lower the quality of service. In addition these items such as the amuse can aid the flow of service in such a way that if done properly the kitchen can have a better idea of what is about to happen in the dining room. Finally the feeling of receiving a complementary item which you did not order is a wonderful feeling that can brighten the entire dining experience. But also these are items that really only have a place in finer dining.

This discussion seems to turn on the notion that fancy dining is good dining. Good service, providing a well-choreographed evening can indeed be a pleasure. But some of the most enjoyable meals I’ve ever had, and will continue anticipate with chili-scented breath, are in the no-star ethnic enclaves of New York. Chinatown, Little India,Belmont, etc. etc. make for far more interesting and memorable meals than the usual 4-star grilled tuna, free-range everything with foam and herbaceous sweet desserts. I refer you all to Eastern Hand Pulled Noodle on Forsyth Street, by the rumbling of the Fung Wa bus and the Manhattan Bridge, for dinner theater at its finest. At about $5.00 per person, including a $1.00 Heineken, rapid service, no time limit and generous portions, you’ll know you’ve had a meal and you’ll think you’ve traveled to China. First class!

If I want a timed meal I’ll call for a 20 minute or its free pizza. Restaurants are sucessful or they are not. There is rarely any in between. As aptly pointed out in this week’s NY Times Dining section — The front of the house must be able to handle a lingering group by perhaps moving them to the bar for a dirnk on the house. Restaurant kitchens are over staffed because there just aren’t enough good cooks. (What cooks are paid is also a problem) not because they prepare an amuse boushe, (which is usually very simple even if it looks or tastes complicated.

If one does not wish to pay $50+ for an entre there are good places to eat.

Value is value. If the meal is terrific and the service is equally terrific, then I don’t mind paying a premium. What I mind is paying for mediocre food and/or sloppy service. At any given price point, what I care about is not the absolute price, but the value. It is true to some extent that value at a high-end price includes an expectation of certain niceties but the absence of those items wouldn’t detract from my experience. I just have serious doubts about whether the prices would then come down or stabilize. I think it would just mean more profit for the owners.

Timed tables are an affront and should be banned by the same Constitutional Amendment that will prohibit parents from allowing their screaming offspring to remain in the restuarant. Refolding napkins and having charger plates is less of a problem than waiters who deliberately withhold water in order to trap the customer by asking a parched person is he would “like some bottled water with your meal?” (In New York this is particularly offensive due to the superb quality of the tap water.) He is correct that amuse bouche have gotten out of hand and recitation of specials has become an annoyance of the first order, usually couched in the conditional tense (“…and that would be served on a bed of Siamese arugala with Andean cocoa leaves.”) Give me a basic, straighforward New Orleans style(or Old New York) waiter any time.

I have been a dedicated reader of the FT weekend edition for more than 15 years…it’s a great read to which Nicolas Lander and Jancis Robinson contribute intelligent essays about restaurants and wine. When I read his column last Saturday, I thought, “oh yes…enough with six dessert courses.” Just give me great food and great old fashioned service…spare me Per Se.

I care a lot about good food, but I can’t often afford fine dining, due in part to the fussy service which I find adds nothing to my enjoyment of a meal. I couldn’t care less about having the charger to look at, and I would gladly forgo the amuse-bouches (amuses-bouche?) if it meant saving a bit on the cost of the meal. I loathe having the server fuss with my napkin (having it put in my lap for me feels downright invasive). And I never even considered that the drawn-out recitation of the special would be anything but an annoying marketing gambit. All I really expect from the waiter is to be able to answer questions about the food and wines without snubbing me, and to bring the food out in a timely fashion. The rest is overkill.

To make a long story short, I haven’t felt the need for pampering since I was about 18 months old. I’d rather the service err on the side of leaving me alone, especially if that would mean saving me money.